[ubuntu-studio-devel] Menu Layout

[lukefromdc at hushmail.com]

Speaking of Debian, the US menus work just fine in upstream 
Debian Unstable. My main systems have been converted to that
due to worries about the Snappy situation. Thus, I can test US packages
in upstream Debian Unstable without setting up a new OS partition.


On 5/19/2015 at 3:49 AM, retail at the-gammons.net wrote:
>
>Hi Len,
> 
>No problems with the rant. It summed up the issues pretty well for 
>me. I need to
>set up my US development VM again and play around with different 
>DE's and the
>menu to understand better (and catch up with you). Last night I 
>took a little
>look at your work on the menu in Launchpad.
>
>> On 19 May 2015 at 01:37 Len Ovens <len at ovenwerks.net> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> Ok, so how does that apply here? Are you saying remove all audio 
>submenus?
>> Don't add more? The categories in the application desktop files 
>do not
>> follow anything worth while. Getting them fixed may be possible 
>for some
>> applications, but often they are not technically wrong. It is 
>why we have
>> had a custom menu from the beginning. To bring some order to 
>where there
>> was none. I would suggest that one of the reasons menus are being
>> abandoned in many DEs, is that the standard is broken/not 
>followed and the
>> standardized menu is a mess. I have filed the same bug report 
>with 4 or 5
>> different DEs where their menu definition does not follow the 
>standard or
>> meet with the intent of the standard. One of them agreed and the 
>rest
>> decided it was not broken "won't fix". So KDE (which was right 
>from the
>> beginning) and xubuntu are correct. lxde, xfce, gnome past and 
>present
>> etc. do not allow the user to be able to reorder the look and 
>feel of
>> their menu as they should be able to. If you want something done 
>right...
>> you have to do it yourself... appears to be where this one sits.
> 
>Personally, I would prefer to work with the standard as far as 
>possible, even if
>it means carrying patches in Ubuntu and pushing them upstream to 
>Debian, and
>further to the projects. But this is the long game, and I feel 
>your pain (having
>experienced non-responsive/slow/resistive upstreams in other 
>areas).
> 
>> If I am to make any changes. I need specifics, not vague 
>comments with no
>> direction. That is why I proposed using a format like above, A 
>diff kind
>> of format. The reason for putting it here is that others can see 
>it, tell
>> me it is wrong (and where) and what the better way would be.
>>
>> I am quite good at manipulating menus in a way that works with 
>different
>> DEs. Maybe not so good at knowing what the best layout is.
> 
>[...]
> 
>I think it is fine to carry on with our menu in the medium term. 
>And maybe you
>are right, that our menu stub will win out in the end. But I was 
>kind of hoping
>that working on an ideal structure would map reasonably well to 
>all approaches.
>I was hoping we would end up with a good place for each "default" 
>application in
>our menu, and then patching the desktop file to match it as best 
>as we can
>within the constraints. WIth Set's work on the video/publishing 
>categories, we
>should soon be in a place to try and present it all in some sort 
>of table?
>
>Cheers,
> 
>Ross